• chaos@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Maybe I’m missing something, but I’m not sure what the worst case scenario is… like, is some company going to get rich off of their proprietary cp and sudo implementation that they forked off of an open one?

    • majster@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      32 minutes ago

      Apple is ok with GPLv2 Bash. Linux kernel is GPLv2, GNU coreutils are GPLv3. Systemd is curiosly also GPLv2. Striping GNU out of GNU/Linux might not be so innocent.

    • tabular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s one thing when a company gets the benefits of people’s contributions and doesn’t give back (in the form of source code when they build upon it and at the time they offer binary files). If a company wants to do the work themselves… well now they don’t have too.

      GPL promoters typically value software freedom, and may believe it’s generally bad for society when software is proprietary. I don’t know what coreutlis does but I doubt there’s a thoughtful reason to choose MIT license for a clone.